What is the word on NBA Live 2004 salary system

by **ReggieMiller31** on Mon Jun 30, 2003 7:42 am

Is there any chance that we could get rid of thi s points and get contracts

With tha MAdden team doing really in depth salarys, I gotta wonder if NBA Live will follow woth in depth contracts and signing bonuses

by **Colin** on Mon Jun 30, 2003 8:41 am

I believe Andrew has talked about the points system Live uses. He figures EA doesn't want the players to seem like money guzzling spenders, so they use points instead. I personnaly don't care which one they use, as long as they change either the salary cap or the infamous salary.ini file. Because the player that might be 50th best in ratings who is 86 or 87 or w/e right now, the player that's 5-th in the year 2010-11 will be 93 or 94 and need so much money that it's not possible to actually sign free agents, but you have to wait until the season begins and sign them for the minimum. That way you end up with teams with starting line-ups of JKidd, Timmy D, Kobe, Tracy and Ben Wallace.

by **ReggieMiller31** on Mon Jun 30, 2003 8:48 am

mb. I didnt see that thread

I dont care if they use the points system, but they need to go more in depth.

In other words, copy what Madden 2004 teams has done

signing bonuses
have the saliers weighted..so taht you get paid mroe at the end of ur contract.
and count the signing bonus agains the cap, so the trading of players would be more risky

YouTube · by **Andrew** on Mon Jun 30, 2003 12:42 pm

I believe Andrew has talked about the points system Live uses. He figures EA doesn't want the players to seem like money guzzling spenders, so they use points instead.

Actually, I always thought it was due to legal issues that aren't a factor in the NFL. :wink:

It's also a simplified version of player salaries and the salary cap, which probably appeals to a broader range of players.

Something that is hopefully implemented in Live 2004 is the ability to make an offer that is independent of the length of the contract. That way, underpaying or overpaying a player is your doing.

I'm not really worried about whether Live 2004 uses a scale of points or real contract amounts, as long as the free agency system works as it should.

by **killerht** on Tue Jul 01, 2003 4:02 am

What I think is that EA should make it so we the GM can offer the player the years and money. In the signing screen, the player can have a box where it says how much he's worth/how much he wants, but if you give him more years but a little less of what he's worth, or what he wants, he maybe will sign. And if you don't a big star player on your team, he would like to sign even more badly cuz he'll be the star on the team.

EA should make players and agents smart. In 2001-2003 players don't re-sign randomly. I had a guy he was 89 overall and we won 4 straight titles, and after his contract, he didn't wanna re-sign, and he was the best player on the team, best in NBA. So, there shouldn't have been one fu**ing reason why he shouldn't have re-signed with me.

What ya'll think?

by **killerht** on Tue Jul 01, 2003 4:13 am

Also with money, EA doesn't have to use the real money that players get in the real NBA. They can make it so players..
99-90 are worth $20 Million - $15 Million
89-80 are worth $14 Million - $10 Million
79-70 are worth $9 Million - $4 Million
69-60 are worth $3 Million - $1 Million
59-50 are worth $900,000 - $300,000
And have a veteran's minimum. Players that are 12+ years in the league and aren't super anymore, but still decent.

Something like that.

And when you wanna sign a player that is like a 92, you gotta offer him a contract that looks something like $17 Million/4-Years.
Or maybe $14 Million/7-Years, cuz he will get a total of $98 Million after the 7 years, and only $68 Million with the 17 Mill/4-Year deal.

That, he would probably accept.

Yes, now what ya'll think?

YouTube · by **Andrew** on Tue Jul 01, 2003 12:53 pm

That's what I meant when I said

I wrote:Something that is hopefully implemented in Live 2004 is the ability to make an offer that is independent of the length of the contract.

In other words, rather than the contract size depending on the length, you could specify both length and size.

99-90 are worth $20 Million - $15 Million
89-80 are worth $14 Million - $10 Million
79-70 are worth $9 Million - $4 Million
69-60 are worth $3 Million - $1 Million
59-50 are worth $900,000 - $300,000
And have a veteran's minimum. Players that are 12+ years in the league and aren't super anymore, but still decent.

That would probably be more realistic, but I personally don't mind a smaller points scale, as long as everything works as it should.

And when you wanna sign a player that is like a 92, you gotta offer him a contract that looks something like $17 Million/4-Years.
Or maybe $14 Million/7-Years, cuz he will get a total of $98 Million after the 7 years, and only $68 Million with the 17 Mill/4-Year deal.

That's the kind of flexibility we need. (Y)

by **Power And Proud** on Tue Jul 01, 2003 8:40 pm

I prefer actual salaries. While the points system may be easier, but money gives the game some more realism.

by **Goodz** on Wed Jul 02, 2003 12:41 am

i agree. it adds to the feel of actually having a dynasty franchise...(OH NO i dont have enought POINTS to re-sign him :shock:

sounds kinda dumb to me)

by **EGarrett** on Wed Jul 02, 2003 1:22 am

It doesn't matter to me as long as they reflect team's actual salary situation. If its points...I want the Knicks tied to Allan Houston for 300,000 for 6 years so that they're screwed for cap room til kingdom come...etc etc.

On a side note...maybe they should just do a straight conversion rather than have a max number. Right now 1 salary point is roughly equivalent to $46.67 of actual salary. By that scale...Kevin Garnett's yearly salary should be around 550,000 salary points. When re-signing players, the 300,000 point max should be enforced...but initially the salaries should be more equivalent to the actual deals.

by **Metsis** on Thu Jul 03, 2003 1:25 am

killerht wrote:EA should make players and agents smart. In 2001-2003 players don't re-sign randomly. I had a guy he was 89 overall and we won 4 straight titles, and after his contract, he didn't wanna re-sign, and he was the best player on the team, best in NBA. So, there shouldn't have been one fu**ing reason why he shouldn't have re-signed with me.

What ya'll think?

There are all sorts of reasons a player might not want to resign with a team... And this is how a random factor can be reasoned with. But there should be less randomness in all this. You should be able to tell by some figure roughly how a player feels and thus trying to make him more comfortable in the team or trading him away.

There are tons of reasons... The player is looking for a change etc. Even now in the real NBA Kobe has said through his agent that he will be testing the free agent waters next year although the lakers are one of the top teams especially if they can get some help for Kobe and Shaq with the mid-level exception.

by **Goodz** on Thu Jul 03, 2003 3:32 am

what if by the time a superstars (88-99) contract is done his team's win % would affect his interest in re-signing.

by **Metsis** on Thu Jul 03, 2003 4:40 am

Win% could affect the players resign process. I know it is extremely frustrating when your star refuses sign. There's nothing you can do in Live 2003 after that. He's gone and you won't have cap to sign another star. No one ever is under the cap in Live 2003. I'd hate to see the game if the AI would be careful about going to the luxury tax, cause then the minimum contract super-stars would quadruple.

A player might not sign with a team cause the wind is blowing from the south that day... Or something the coach said in november... There are so many reasons that a player might want to leave. Who knows??? What we need is a tool/meter/happiness thing that we can do a little fortune telling and guess if a player wants to stay or go... The meter shouldn't be absolute... Also the happiness meter could affect the players game performance... You know, when happy he plays better and when not so happy, well you get the idea.

Also the resign process should be multiphased. You offer contracts and then the players decide whether they take it or hold out for more or test the fa market.

by **Goodz** on Thu Jul 03, 2003 4:52 am

Also the happiness meter could affect the players game performance... You know, when happy he plays better and when not so happy, well you get the idea

i like that. so that there would be some senarios like Van Exel in Denver where he just didnt try because he wanted out.

by **TRUball** on Thu Jul 03, 2003 5:43 am

Goodz wrote:
Also the happiness meter could affect the players game performance... You know, when happy he plays better and when not so happy, well you get the idea

i like that. so that there would be some senarios like Van Exel in Denver where he just didnt try because he wanted out.

I agree, i also like that than if the happyness meter is low you could do certain things to improve it like signing new players including the player more in the rotation(if not in the rotation) or liek making the offence run through them(if they are the star player) etc.

by **Goodz** on Fri Jul 04, 2003 8:05 am

I agree, i also like that than if the happyness meter is low you could do certain things to improve it like signing new players including the player more in the rotation(if not in the rotation) or liek making the offence run through them(if they are the star player) etc.

yeah that'd be great. this could also affect how much your player could be interested in resigning also. so you know where you stand instead of just yes or no.

by **Swoosh** on Fri Jul 04, 2003 7:44 pm

Now an happiness meter, i could dig that :lol:

by **Metsis** on Sat Jul 05, 2003 1:26 am

Also, for the happiness meter would accompany a reason text box... So that you could see if a player was unhappy and you were doing fine, to see that a player doesn't like a player on the team, a coach, his playing style or would just want a change of scenery...

And something positive too... Glad that team is doing well. Is proud of his performance, really likes the coaching, really likes a player on the squad etc.

And the text box could contain one or two words only. The happiness bar would tell how happy/unhappy the player is and the text box would give a reason if any. There should also be times that the text box is empty for those neutral times. But the box could contain texts like: coach, own performance, record, minutes, starting, contract, (team mates name) etc. etc...

This could force you to revamp your team if a players wasn't liked. And would give you some motivation in keeping that really well liked veteran on your team instead of trading him for a younger player... This would give a little more weight to the managing side, but wouldn't be that indepth and still be relative to the game results and the outcome of the season.

All who disagree, well mail me... Cause I don't think anyone would think the game was less good with these few changes.

by **Swoosh** on Sat Jul 05, 2003 2:17 am

Metsis u are right but it might get too complicated, cuz it would almost turn out to be like a game like civilazation, keeping all ur inhabitants happy, but seriously now, u have valid points there that i like really much but if u think about it, and thats just a fact no matter what u say, there are ALWAYS unhappy players who dont like certain things, no matter what, if u already look @ the forum, some ppl want this others that, one findes something great other think it stinks, thats just not possible to have every player or coach happy about everything, not even mentioning players with temper like stephen jackson for example, things those guys tell if they are upset arent always really meant and they can regret it afterwards, its just too complicated to go that far i think,also players who dont like each other always come around but it doesnt mean they have no respect or can form a great duo on the court, its not like kobe and shaq are the best friends u will ever meet, u see were im going? Dont get me wrong i like the idea but is has to be thought over very well. It would be a nice feature but keep it simple has been my filosophy all the time, and not everybody is going to want it of course, unless they make it an option or something, these things take time and arent that simple to implement so, maybe live 2007 :wink:

?

by **Ruff Ryder** on Sat Jul 05, 2003 3:20 am

In the next live you should be able to offer contract extensions for players and coaches.

YouTube · by **Andrew** on Sat Jul 05, 2003 12:38 pm

Extensions would be great. It would be both realistic and useful to lock up your player with an extension before he has a chance to test the free agent waters. Of course a player wouldn't automatically agree to an extension.

10 day contracts would also be a nice touch, but probably not all that necessary unless injuries are more common, leaving you with a shortage of players.

by **Ruff Ryder** on Sat Jul 05, 2003 1:05 pm

I used to own a dreamcast and in NBA 2k1 you could offer contracts to anyone during the season. If players got worse(like maybe kobe) they would sign for less. Then they would get better while you got the better of the deal.

by **Vins15** on Sat Jul 05, 2003 2:50 pm

they should have the additon of restricted fa and unrestricted fa as well so that if a unretricted fa there will be more competition and more descision to make..unlike 2003 the team tries to get everyone back and not lose anyone through fa..and if itz a restricted fa u could sign and offer sheet and the formal team gets 15 days to decide if they would match that offer

itz just a way to make the fa more realistic and competitive

by **Metsis** on Sat Jul 05, 2003 9:13 pm

Restricted FA's would be a nice addition... But let's get the free agency to work somewhat realistically for starters and then worry about details.

Again the multiphased contract signing process pops up... You should offer contracts to players and they would either sign it immediatly or give it some time to think about it and they're possibilities in the free agent market. And players that try out the FA scene should be able to sign with the original team if they are willing to take him back...

The summer is the time of rebuilding... And Live games don't have the proper tools for this at the moment. It takes too long to rebuild your team through the draft unless you are willing to totally rip off the AI and deal your retiring veterans for their up and coming rookies. For instance could you think of Cleveland dealing LeBron for Reggie Miller??? I think this deal could be completed with some wheeling and dealing in Live 2003 if LeBron was there that is.

by **killerht** on Sun Jul 06, 2003 3:25 am

What I want is that you should be able to offer a contract to any FA.

In Live 2000-2003 when you do a Franchise, and u finish the playoffs, the CP says, saving stats..... generating rookies.......retiring players.....cpu teams re-siging players.......... on that last one, we should be able to look at the players that their teams wanna re-sign and make a better offer. It sucks to only have the players that didn't re-sign in the FA list. Most of the time the FA's suck. I only get one 80+ guy, and he never wants to sign, and the rest are low 70s and high 60s.

You know what I'm sayin' G-Man?

What is the word on NBA Live 2004 salary system

What is the word on NBA Live 2004 salary system

Who is online